2008 Woodie Awards
A&E review 'illegitimate'
Matthew DeMello
Issue date: 2/13/08 Section: Opinion
I have never read a more undeserving favorable review in my life than the five-star review for Michael Buble's May 2007 record Call Me Irresponsible.
The review cites Buble's closeness in style to Sinatra, his Grammies and his ability to sedate listeners as qualifications. I understand this is a mere difference in opinion between two individuals, but as a musician and someone who genuinely cares about the fate of the music industry, I don't understand why any of these ideals would qualify Mr. Buble's album as any fine art. Never mind the finest art that a five-star review would suggest. As any musician, music collector, historian or authoritarian will tell you, these qualifications are every reason to qualify an artist as irrelevant and unmoving to the future of the musical community. Michael Buble is a cash cow for nostalgists who have suddenly grown disinterested in the first Frank Sinatra Jr., and Mr. Harry Connick Jr. Yet unlike Buble, Connick Jr. is by all means defendable even under the harshest scrutiny.
Harry Connick Jr. was something fresh and unexpected in an era dominated by depressing Nirvana-ripoffs and second-rate Pearl Jam archetypes flooding the grunge market of the 1990s. Dissimilarly, Michael Buble comes to the public in an era already overflowing with radio-friendly aging crooners and still he brings nothing remotely brilliant or valuable to the table. This even rings true when he pathetically mines for R&B crossover capacity on the album's centerpiece "Comin' Home" featuring 90s has-beens Boyz II Men.
Buble has been doing this his whole career. In fact, he has spent so much time positioning himself as a simple caricature that it is sometimes impossible to distinguish the integrity of his covers from that of lounge-pop satirist Richard Cheese. His cover of the Beatles' "Can't Buy Me Love" on 2005's It's Time and Clapton's "Wonderful Tonight" off the album reviewed in The Chronicle could have easily been played alongside anything on Cheese's hysterical and fantastical Lounge Against The Machine album. Both records are hysterical and like Buble, they're all cheesy.
The review cites Buble's closeness in style to Sinatra, his Grammies and his ability to sedate listeners as qualifications. I understand this is a mere difference in opinion between two individuals, but as a musician and someone who genuinely cares about the fate of the music industry, I don't understand why any of these ideals would qualify Mr. Buble's album as any fine art. Never mind the finest art that a five-star review would suggest. As any musician, music collector, historian or authoritarian will tell you, these qualifications are every reason to qualify an artist as irrelevant and unmoving to the future of the musical community. Michael Buble is a cash cow for nostalgists who have suddenly grown disinterested in the first Frank Sinatra Jr., and Mr. Harry Connick Jr. Yet unlike Buble, Connick Jr. is by all means defendable even under the harshest scrutiny.
Harry Connick Jr. was something fresh and unexpected in an era dominated by depressing Nirvana-ripoffs and second-rate Pearl Jam archetypes flooding the grunge market of the 1990s. Dissimilarly, Michael Buble comes to the public in an era already overflowing with radio-friendly aging crooners and still he brings nothing remotely brilliant or valuable to the table. This even rings true when he pathetically mines for R&B crossover capacity on the album's centerpiece "Comin' Home" featuring 90s has-beens Boyz II Men.
Buble has been doing this his whole career. In fact, he has spent so much time positioning himself as a simple caricature that it is sometimes impossible to distinguish the integrity of his covers from that of lounge-pop satirist Richard Cheese. His cover of the Beatles' "Can't Buy Me Love" on 2005's It's Time and Clapton's "Wonderful Tonight" off the album reviewed in The Chronicle could have easily been played alongside anything on Cheese's hysterical and fantastical Lounge Against The Machine album. Both records are hysterical and like Buble, they're all cheesy.
Viewing Comments 1 - 5 of 5
Josh McAlister
posted 2/13/08 @ 2:17 PM EST
I agree with your opinion. Aside from Buble's ability to immitate, he doesn't appear to have much talent. From where I sit he does not deserve the praise. (Continued…)
Raquel De Haro
posted 2/13/08 @ 5:08 PM EST
I disagree with this article. I love his voice! He has an energy and charisma that are undescribable. I have been to his concerts and they leave me wanting more! When you listen to his music you can feel his emotions. (Continued…)
Melinda Lennox
posted 2/13/08 @ 6:41 PM EST
I agree totally. I had often wondered why Michael Buble did not quite cut it with me and had put it down to the fact that he is not a musician, unlike Harry Connick who is an amazingly talented musician, being composer, arranger and instrumentalist as well as singer (and has won 3 grammys, I think). (Continued…)
Jackie Faught
posted 2/14/08 @ 8:46 AM EST
The only thing I find illegitimate in your 2 page harange is your close-minded, obviously uninformed, opinions. Shame on you for calling yourself a musician. (Continued…)
joe evans
posted 2/14/08 @ 1:52 PM EST
it is clearly obvious mr DeMello who wrote this piece must be a hugely accomplished musician who takes time out of his exploding music career to write for the Quinnipiac chronical !! This piece is so wrong its sick you have any gig writing at all. (Continued…)
Post a Comment